Delhi HC dismisses plea by Dukhtaran-e-Millat against Centre’s decision of declaring it a terrorist group

The DeM had moved the High Court requesting a copy of the UAPA notification and its removal from the list

January 20, 2023

Delhi HC rejects plea by separatist leader Asiya Andrabi’s organization against central order

The Delhi High Court dismissed a plea by an all-women outfit Dukhtaran-e-Millat (DeM) challenging the Centre’s 2004 decision of listing it as a terrorist organization under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), 1967

The DeM had moved the High Court requesting for a copy of the UAPA notification and its removal from the list of organizations mentioned in the First Schedule of the Act.

The founding leader of DeM is Kashmiri separatist Asiya Andrabi, who was arrested by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) in 2018 and is currently in judicial custody.

A single-judge bench of Justice Anish Dayal dismissed the plea noting that the organization if it wanted, could have made an application to the Centre seeking its removal from the Schedule, as it is available as a remedy under the UAPA. However, it was not exercised in the matter.

The court noted: “A perusal of the provisions of UAPA shows that chapter VI provides for adding a terrorist organization or individuals as part of the Schedule (as per section 35) and section 36 provided that an application may be made to the Central government to exercise power under section 35(1)(c) to remove an organization from the Schedule.”

The organization that claims the freedom of Kashmir from India contended that they got to know about being declared a terrorist organization only in 2018 when chargesheets were filed in court 2018 against its members.

To this, appearing for the Centre, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Chetan Sharma said that though DeM was declared a terrorist organization on December 30, 2004, the group chose to come to court only after 18 years.

He argued that the government has the right to decide who is a terrorist and who is not. “It is the prerogative of the Central government to say who is a terrorist and who is not,” Sharma said. He added that the information on the same was already in the public domain.

Justice Dayal told the DeM’s counsel: “To be fair, you cannot say that when the Schedule was promulgated in 2004 and is in the public domain, it has to be specifically communicated. What procedure happened because you were a banned organization is a different issue, it is not before this court. Your prayer is to quash the notification. The procedure for de-notification has to be processed first. In Section 36, the de-notification procedure is given, you have to go there. Then the government needs to apply its mind.”

Section 3 gives power to the Centre to declare an association unlawful. Terrorist organizations are mentioned in the First Schedule of the Act.

“Accordingly in view of these provisions, the petition is dismissed since an alternative remedy prescribed under the statutes is available to the petitioner,” the court said.

[With Inputs from IANS]

PGurus is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel and stay updated with all the latest news and views

For all the latest updates, download PGurus App.